Male Headship Part 2

Last week, I began a discussion on the biblical issue of “male-headship.” Of course, that’s not entirely accurate. I didn’t begin anything. The conversation on “male-headship” has been going on for quite some time and all I did was drop my own little pebble into the already muddied waters. But seeing the little splash my pebble created was quite gratifying and so I will drop again. I left off last time with a promise to discuss the word “head” (Ephesians 5:23) and I will do so now.

Much has been written about this word (by those much smarter than me) and I do not wish to reiterate their work here, but suffice it to say that the word we read as “head” (the Greek word kephale) in passages such as Ephesians 5:23 or 1 Corinthians 11:3 is a word which means – and this is important – head. It’s true! If Paul wanted to clearly say head, he could not have been more clear…and yet that is what makes interpretation so difficult! Because what does “head” mean?

If I want to talk about the top of my body, head is the word. But because the head is at the top of my body I can also use the word head to refer to the top of anything, even if it doesn’t have two ears, two eyes, etc. Head can also mean leader, as our complementarian brothers and sisters love to point out; it can also mean a guide (a leader who really doesn’t have any authority, just happens to be in front.) And if that were not complicated enough, head can also mean “source”; think of a river. So which of these (and remember it doesn’t have to be just one) was Paul thinking of when he wrote?

As a starting place, it’s helpful to recognize that at the very least Paul is thinking of a literal (now we have to decide which meaning is literal!) head. That is to say the two ears, two eyes, etc. lump on top of a body. We know this because in Ephesians 5:23 Paul is also going to mention a body (though clearly metaphorically) and in 1 Corinthians 11 he is going to go on to talk about the head as something which has hair on it. So Paul wants us to be thinking about a human head as it relates to a human body. But it is also clear that Paul is using this idea as a metaphor – the church is not a literal body, but rather a body with many members helps us to understand the church (think 1 Corinthians 12). So the metaphor is helping us to see that the husband is intimately connected to the wife, just as Christ is intimately connected to the church, just as a head is intimately connected to the body. How is this connection made? That is to say is it an authoritarian connection (the husband is the “leader” of the wife just as Christ is the “leader” of the church)? Or is it a question of origin? (The husband is the “source” of the wife just as Christ is the “source” of the church)? And my answer to this is…hmmm not sure we can say, and furthermore I’m not sure Paul wanted us to say! Why? Because right after Paul says that Christ is the head and the church is the body (Ephesians 5:23) he goes on to say that Christ is also the Savior of the church! And not one of us (I hope) would be comfortable saying “The husband is the Savior of the wife just as Christ is the Savior of the church.” So by very definition we are left to conclude that Paul is making a comparison between the husband/wife relationship and the Christ/church relationship – but it is not an exact comparison!!! It can’t be! And if it is, than I am my wife’s Savior, something that is uncomfortable for me to even write; even in jest. And so I think it is safe to say Paul is creating a metaphor to teach us about intimacy of relationship while at the very same time inviting us not to take the metaphor too far because as soon as we do, it will, like all good metaphors, fall apart. (Lest you think I am creating a new hermeneutic, consider Jesus’ words in Mark 10:45 that he is a ransom. This is a very helpful metaphor to think about Jesus dying for us, but as soon as we take the metaphor too far we start asking unanswerable questions such as, “Who was the ransom paid too?”)

So in summary, and as I mentioned last week, I think we need to see the word “head” in the context of a much larger metaphor. Let me also mention, that last week I stated that perhaps “head” was not the most helpful word and I tantalizingly suggested I would offer an alternative. Well I spent all week trying to think of one…and I got nothing. Head is the word Paul used, head is the word God inspired Paul to use, and I guess that’s good enough for me.

I think that’s enough for this week which means I will put off for next time the question, Is it easier “to be subject”, or “to love”?